PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT
Development Brief
Site H2 (7) Field 690A, Maufant, St. Saviour.
Purpose of the Report
To obtain Ministerial approval of the development brief for Site H2 (7) Field 690A, Maufant, St. Saviour.
Background
Field 690A, Maufant was zoned as a category A housing site under Policy H2 of the Island Plan in 2002. Assurance was given to the States that the public would be consulted on the planning briefs for each site prior to an application being determined.
The proposal to develop this land has been quite controversial and has involved several Public meeting, at the request of Deputies Hill and Le Herissier, which began as long ago as November 2003, recently culminating in a formal public exhibition in June 2005. Unfortunately, the former Committee was unable to determine the brief before it left office. In frustration and because of contractual commitments, the developer Marrett Homes was been forced to submit a planning application, at their own risk, in advance of the brief being approved.
The residents of Maufant Village have recently viewed the details of the application and have responded in a letter dated 27 February 2006, attached.
The application remains in abeyance until the brief has been approved.
Discussion
A public consultation on the draft development brief and layout for Field 690A, Maufant, St. Saviour took place on 1st to 3rd June 2005 at Maufant Variety Centre and was attended by approximately 120 people.
The Island Plan considered Field 690A to be a logical extension of the existing village and suggested a development potential of:
o Approximately 38 homes in the respective proportions of 55% first-time buyers and 45% for social rent;
o An area of public open space with footpaths connecting to the existing village;
o A landscaped buffer to the east to maintain the rural ambiance of the lanes;
o Vehicular access through the existing village.
A local developer produced a scheme for a possible housing development for 26 first-time buyer and 22 social rented family homes.
DENSITY, LAYOUT, DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING
Density
The Island Plan suggested that the site could provide approximately 38 family homes, retaining a large portion of the land for amenity open space. The scheme produced by the developer in response to the draft brief for the public exhibition, proposed 48 family dwellings with a smaller area of public open space.
The residents view was that the scheme was still too dense and the number of units should be reduced.
A Comparison of Densities of the Existing Village and Proposed Development
Location Total Area (inc open space) Homes per acre
MV 1 (151 homes) 11.2 acres 13
MV 2 (56 homes) 3.8 acres 15.
Field 690A (48 homes) 4.8 acres 10.
NOTE: Deputy Hill has raised issues of dimensional accuracy of the site area and consequently the density. The site area in the Island Plan of 2.7 acres (6.8 vergees) is incorrect. The areas have been doubled checked and the correct land area of Field 690A is in fact 4.6 acres (10.43 vergees).
Officer Recommendation
The Island Plan suggests an approximate number of dwellings. The comparative dwellings show that the proposed development is significantly lower in density than MV1 & 2.
Accordingly there is more than adequate public and private amenity space within the scheme. The only purpose to lower the density would be to reduce the potential number of vehicles using Clos du Feuvre.
Layout
The layout reflects that of Maufant Village phase 2, which was based on the principles used in the Essex design guide. This scheme uses some of those townscape principles to help create a sense of place, but introducing considerably more open space, landscaping and car parking.
Concern expressed over the close proximity of some of the proposed houses to existing boundary, resulting in damage to trees.
Concern expressed over the physical separation between the social rented housing and first time buyers which could lead to social exclusion. View express that social rented houses should be ‘pepper potted’ throughout the development.
Officer Recommendation
Having consulted with the Jersey Homes Trust, it is not agreed that the social rented homes should be ‘pepper potted’ throughout the scheme. The first time buyer and social rented houses are placed in separate physical groups for acquisition and management purposes, which has worked successfully at Belle Vue, St Brelade as opposed to the ‘pepper pot’ strategy used at Gorey Village.
It is agreed that the proposed houses should be moved further away from the west boundary so as not to damage existing tree roots.
Design
The dwellings are similar in design to Maufant Village Phase 2 and generally supported by the public. However there was minor criticism over the house type B dormer window design, which should be redesigned to avoid the rainwater gutter running in front of the window.
Officer Recommendation
It is agreed that the dormer window detail is poor and should be redesigned.
Landscaping
The Island Plan suggested that the development of the site could provide an opportunity for much needed public open space, also that a pedestrian access route should be created into the existing village.
The provision of open space was widely welcomed, but concern was expressed about locating the space in the eastern corner of the site. Local knowledge informed that the back lanes are used by teenagers to ‘hang out’. Locating the open space in a remote unsupervised area would encourage young people to congregate in this area.
Residents also considered the proposed pedestrian bridge link to Maufant Village 2 was unnecessary. They argued that the pedestrian desire line is already well established with a formal footpath leading to the village green and the scheme should link to this in the North West corner of the development site, rather than create a new link which does not respect the desire line.
A discussion with the St Martins Parish Roads Committee and Maufant Village Residents Association suggested that a requirement for play equipment would impose a liability either on the residents or the Parish and that the inclusion of play equipment should be a decision of the local community.
Officer Recommendation
It is agreed that the open space should be moved to the North West corner, which could then link with the existing village green. The open space would be overlooked by the surrounding houses (existing and new) and this space would help link the three villages phase.
It is agreed that the proposed footbridge be deleted from the scheme.
It is agreed that the open space should be sufficient to accommodate play equipment if required by the residents in the future.
VEHICULAR ACCESS AND CAR PARKING
The Island Plan suggested that access and egress should be through Clos du Feuvre which technically complies with Public Services Technical Guidance – Road Type C (serving up to 25 dwellings). The guide requires a minimum carriageway width of 5.0 metres with a 1.3 metre wide footway along one side. Alternatively a shared surface may be acceptable if suitable traffic calming is built into the design.
The feasibility study established that the width of Clos du Feuvre was found to be approximately 5.0 metres wide with a 1.5m footway on each side. The opinion of PSD Highways was that Clos du Feuvre was technically acceptable to serve a development of approximately 40 family homes.
The consultation scheme showed a development of 48 family dwellings using Clos du Feuvre for both access and egress. The issue of vehicular access and egress was one of the main issues of concern and many commented on the difficulties that this would bring to those people already living in the cul de sac.
The Housing Committee currently administer the Maufant Village roads and the developer has agreed to pay a consideration of £100,000 plus £10,000 per unit to obtain access rights through Clos du Feuvre. The Housing Committee would use the funds to reinstate the existing Maufant Village roads and subject to the agreement of a Parish Assembly, would transfer the administration to the Parish.
Note: the Housing Committees Projet 20/2005, Field 690A, Maufant, St Martin: Sale of Rights, was approved by the States on 5 April 2005. See attached copy.
Several access options were suggested by the public; these have been discussed with the Highways Department and Parish Roads committee and are outlined below:
Option 1 - Access and egress through Clos do Feuvre.
Access through Clos du Feuvre is the preferred option of the Island Plan.
PSD Highways confirmed that Clos du Feuvre meets the technical requirements in terms of visibility, carriageway width and provision of footways, to serve a development of approximately 40 family homes.
However, Clos du Feuvre is a cul de sac serving only 12 houses for the last 25 years and concerns have been raised by those residents, and others, about the change in status to a busy through route serving a development of 48 family homes.
In addition, concerns were also raised about the loss of on street parking which residents have enjoyed for the last 25 years, and the difficulties that would be encountered by visitors such a doctors, deliveries, etc.
There was also concern over the lack of emergency access to the site.
Option 2 – Access through existing village green, the corner of 15 Clos du Feuvre and adjacent footpaths
This option involves creating a new access road through the existing village green, taking the corner of no 15 Clos du Feuvre and adjacent privately owned footpaths, located to the north east corner of the development site.
The maximum width that can be achieved for the new access road would be 5 meters wide, which would rely on a shared pedestrian surface and would comply with Technical Guidance – Road Type C.
The land required to create the access is in several separate ownerships -
· The Housing Committee administer the village green, however some residents of MV2 pointed out that this is the only area open space they have access to.
· No. 15 Clos du Feuvre is owned by a Mr & Mrs Hughes, who have landscaped the garden. The minimum land area required is approximately 7 sq. m.
· Small areas of the adjacent footpaths are also required to create the access road and these are in the joint ownership of Nos 12 to 15 Clos du Feuvre.
PSD Highways opinion is that in addition to the potential legal difficulties and accommodation works to 15 Clos de Feuvre the following issues would need to be taken into account:
· There is currently 3.5m between the rear of 15 Clos du Feuvre, and the west boundary wall of 4 La Rue Vaudin. A single carriageway access, with a give way arrangement, for two way traffic, could be provided at this pinch point behind 15 Clos du Feuvre. This arrangement would require opposing traffic, to be fully effective as a calming feature, and it is unlikely for the road to ever be busy enough for this to be the case. A separate pedestrian space will therefore have to be provided, with a kerb up stand, to a minimum width of 1.5m. This requires the acquisition of up to 2m of the end of the garden belonging to 15 Clos du Feuvre. (Subject to survey and detailed design)
· La Rue Gallie requires little adjustment other than positioning the proposed access road where appropriate visibility and kerb radii can be achieved
· There is a level difference across the pinch point which would necessitate the construction of a retaining wall on one side or the other.
· There is a culvert running under and through this pinch point area which could require some extension and protection measures, to accommodate a road over the top.
· A retaining wall constructed to the south would probably ease protection problems to culvert by increasing cover.
· The above retaining wall and culvert extension could cost of the order £20,000.
· The emergency services would have to be consulted on this arrangement.
The developer would need to purchase access rights and from all land owners and interested parties.
Note: Property Services advise that the various owner could claim a sizeable part of the access rights for the new development which would lessen the amount of money available to the Housing Committee to undertake road improvements in the village.
If the developer fails to negotiate the acquisition of the land, then the Law Officer advises against the Committee getting involved using compulsory purchase.
Option 3 – Creation of one way system using Clos du Feuvre & Chasse du Morin
This option would involve creating a one way system using either Clos du Feuvre or Chasse du Morin as the entry or exit
PSD Highways opinion is that any option that creates an entrance onto La Chasse du Mourin may encourage drivers to use La Rue de Camp Colin or La Rue de Sergent, both of which are substandard with ultimately substandard junctions on to main roads.
One way systems can generate higher vehicle speeds where vehicle drivers know they will not meet on coming vehicles. Road calming measures which could be used to address high vehicle speed would generate intrusive noise and vibration.
The provision of adequate visibility at the junction of La Chasse du Mourin and La Grand Route de St Martin, would involve the acquisition of land from a third party.
The provision of passing places (in Chasse du Morin), while theoretically possible, would require the acquisition of land from third parties. A scheme would have to be worked up for an indication of cost to be formulated.
Chasse du Mourin is a Parish road, it would therefore require the support of the Parish for such a scheme.
Option 4 – Widen Chasse du Morin to provide access to the development
This option would involve the widening of Chasse du Mourin to provide a 5 m carriage way and 1.3m footway. It would require the acquisition of land from the Morin Vineries site and the laying of a new road and drainage, over a 300m length.
PSD Highways opinion is that Chasse du Mourin would have to be brought up to an appropriate standard along its entire length (from field 690A to La Grand Route de St Martin). This would require substantial work with the associated acquisition of third party owned land, as well as improvements to the junction with La Grand Route de St Martin. It is doubtful whether 48 Category A houses would generate sufficient cash to fund such an improvement.
Chasse du Mourin is a Parish road; it would therefore require the support of the Parish for such a scheme.
As there would be no reliance on Maufant Village for access or egress, there would be no access payment and consequently no money for the village road improvements.
Also any option that creates an entrance onto La Chasse du Mourin may encourage drivers to use La Rue de Camp Colin or La Rue de Sergent, both of which are substandard with ultimately substandard junctions on to main roads.
Option 5 – Access through future Mourin Vineries development
This option depends upon Morin Vineries being developed. The Morin Vineries site is an H4 site and there can be no reliance at this stage of it being required or even acceptable for development, and it may be many years before it is considered for development, if at all.
PSD Highways opinion is that it could not recommend the approval of a development, which relied on initial substandard road infrastructure, which may or may not be improved in the future.
As there would be no reliance on Maufant Village for access or egress, there would be no access payment and consequently no money for the village road improvements.
Officer Recommendation
It is recommended that Option 1 - Access and egress through Clos do Feuvre, is technically and legally the most appropriate option, with an emergency access created onto La Chasse du Morin.
CAR PARKING
The scheme provides for a total of 157 car parking spaces, allocated as follows:
· 141 dedicated parking space (3 spaces per dwelling)
· 16 visitor parking spaces (1 space per 3 dwellings)
The requirement in draft PPG1 is:
· 3 parking spaces per dwelling
· 1 space per 2 dwellings
Accordingly the proposed scheme fails to comply with the minimum car parking standards of the draft PPG.
In addition, the residents requested that the scheme should not add to the existing parking problems, rather it should help to alleviate the problems by increasing the number of visitor parking spaces.
Also, Clos du Feuvre residents pointed out that in previous discussions, the developer had promised to replace any lost on street parking from Clos du Feuvre in the new development, but this was not shown on the plans.
Officer Recommendation
It is agreed that the development should provide:
· 3 parking spaces per 3 bed dwelling (minimum);
· 1 visitor space shared between every 2 dwellings;
· Plus a further 12 parking spaces in close proximity to Close du Feuvre which will provide for any displaced on-street parking.
·
OVERLOOKING AND LOSS OF PRIVACY
The draft brief highlighted the need to avoid prejudicing adjacent property from overlooking, loss of privacy and over bearing impact. However, it is a difficult issue to address at the best of times and inevitably there will always be some properties that will claim some form of prejudice.
Concern was expressed about possible overlooking and loss of privacy.
Officer Recommendation
It is agreed that the proposed dwellings shown along the west boundary may have an impact on privacy because of the close proximity to the boundary and the possible damage to the existing trees and a greater distance should be achieved so as not to damage existing tree roots.
The proposed dwellings to the east and south boundaries have no overlooking, loss of privacy or overshadowing effect on adjacent existing dwellings. However correspondence from the owner of Le Picachon, raised the issue of the potential effect of the development on La Chasse du Mourin, which is a green lane, particularly if vehicular access is permitted onto it. This comment reflects that made in the Island Plan and a substantial landscape buffer will be required in order to maintain the ambiance of the green lane.
It is not agreed that there is overlooking, loss of privacy or over bearing impact caused by the exhibited scheme, however in view of the modifications that are required, these issue will be carefully considered with any revised layout.
SOCIAL RENTED HOUSING
In accordance with Policy H1 of the Island Plan, the draft brief requires the development to be 55% first time buyer homes and 45% social rented homes.
An issue that repeatedly came up is the negative reaction to social rented housing, particularly the provision of family homes.
Officer Recommendation
This site was specifically zoned to meet the need of family homes, under policies H1 & H2 of the Island Plan. In addition, Field 690A is ideally suited to the development of family homes given availability of existing facilities and the provision of family homes is consistent with the Island Plan spatial strategy, which seeks to ensure an equitable distribution of homes.
PRIMARY SCHOOL CAPACITY
The following comment was received from the Education Department:
A development of 40 x 3 bedroom units would yield around 26 primary aged children of whom we would expect around 14 to seek entry to St Martin's Primary School.
The predictions are fairly secure up until around 2010 and it is unlikely that St Martin will present any capacity during that period.
The primary school does not have capacity to take the children from this development.
I would expect this site to yield around 14 children seeking entry to St Martin's Primary school who are not already being educated there. Whilst this is a small development the school is effectively full and is unlikely to be able to absorb even this number.
The children from the 40 houses could certainly be accommodated in Trinity and Grouville but it is unlikely that these specific children would be re-routed. We would apply the normal criteria for admission.
Officer Recommendation
The Education Department have confirmed that Trinity and Grouville Primary schools have sufficient capacity to meet the primary school need.
LOCAL GROUND CONDITION PROBLEMS
Residents commented that the area is renowned for having ground condition problems and the existing estate had severe problems during construction.
Officer Recommendation
The developer to be advised of the possible local ground condition problems.
EXISTING TOAD POPULATION
The existing toad population living around the stream must be protected.
Officer Recommendation
It is agreed that the developer shall liaise with the Environment Dept’s and implement the necessary measures to protect the existing and future toad population and habitat.
LARGE DELIVERY VEHICLES
The plan indicated that the contractor’s compound would be accessed off Chasse du Morin, and this has been agreed with the St Martin’s Roads Committee. However it also indicate that because of the restricted nature of Chasse du Morin, large delivery vehicles would have to access the site via Clos du Feuvre.
Concern was expressed over the use of Clos du Feuvre by large delivery vehicles.
Officer Recommendation
It is acknowledged that Clos du Feuvre is the only reasonable access for large delivery vehicles, which the developer made clear in the consultation. Accordingly, the developer will need to liaise on delivery times with the Housing Department (who administer the eastate roads) and the Maufant Village Residents Association.
Representation from Deputy Hill
Deputy Hill has raised the following concerns on behalf of residents of Maufant Village in his letter dated 22 February 2006 :
Accuracy of site area;
Vehicular access;
Density;
Primary School capacity;
Legal covenant;
Outstanding repair and maintenance issues.
The Deputy has requested a meeting with the Minister before any approval is given.
Recommendation
It is recommended that following consideration of the report and discussion with Deputy Hill, the Minister of Planning and Environment:
- Agree the necessary amendments and approve the development brief;
- Invite an application in accordance with the development brief.
Reason(s) for Decision
To comply with the States strategic decision to provide affordable homes and increase home ownership.
Action Required
- In the light of the planning application having been submitted, to inform the Planning Applications Panel that the brief has now been approved and to forward them a copy of the finalised brief to assist them in determining the planning application.
Written by: | Tony Gottard, Principal Planner |
| |
Approved by: | Kevin Pilley, Assistant Director – Policy & Projects |
| |
Endorsed by: | Peter Thorne, Director of Planning |
Attachments:
Draft development brief, Site No H2 (7) – Field 690A, Maufant, St Martin issued March 2003;
Housing Committees Projet 20/2005, Field 690A, Maufant, St Martin: Sale of Rights, was approved by the States on 5 April 2005;
Maufant Village Association letter dated 15th July 2005;
Maufant Village Association letter dated 27th February 2006;
Deputy Hill letter dated 22 Feb 2006.
8/37/7
1 March 2006
gov.je